The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1887-04-23


known in history as having possessed tn
throne of Egypt for period, and who woul'
naturally have favored the tribe of Hebrew
shepherds who came to dwell in the land.
But we are told that new king came Il
the throne of Egypt who knew not Joseph
Who this new king was may not be certainl!
determined. A long time must have elapsed
after the death of Joseph before the new kins
beheld with alarm the great and incre asinG
numbers of the Hebrew people. Sixty-foul
years at least (279 according to the Hebrew
chronology separates the birth of Nose:
(B. @. 1871 from the death of Joseph (B. @
1885,. The new king began his reign and the
oppression of the lsraelites some time pre-
vious to the birth of Moses But owing tc
the confused state of Scriptural and Egyp-
tian chronology and the circumstances OF
Biblical history to be considered, it is diff
cult, if not, indeed, impossible, in the pres
emit stage of Biblical and historical criticism,
to designate the Egyptian ruler, whose severe
treatment of the Israelites is described in
our Lesson. Rameses the Great, whose
images and statues remain in Egypt and
whose mummy has recently been discovered
and identified, is accepted by most modern
scholars and Psychologists as the Pharaoh
"who knew not Joseph" and oppressed the
Israelites. The known history of his reign
best accords with the Biblical account; but
the events 40 not appear to synchronize. We
must bear in mind, however, that we have no
unquestionably reliable chronology of early
Biblical or Egyptian history. The reign of
Amosis l., the founder of the Eighteenth or
first Iheban Dynasty, appears to be nearly
synchronous with the fight of Moses, which,
according to Manetho, the distinguished Egyp-
tan historian, occurred under his reign. Ac-
cording to Josephus, the Jewish historian,
the Shepherd Kings were dethroned in Egypt
by Amosis or Tethmosis. But the history
of this reign is too obscure to identify it with
the events of Hebrew history. One of these
monarchs may have been the new king who
gained the throne of Egypt and who deter
mined to change the policy of the govern
ment toward the race or family of Joseph,
the famous Hebrew Grand Vizier.
For an interesting account of the discovery
and identification OF the mummy of Rameses
H., which was made (the discovery July 5,
1881, (the unwrapplng and Identification
June /, 1886, and which is now on exhibition
in the Boulak Museum, see UniUerS0hSt
Quarterly for October, 1886.
COP had promised to make Israel numer-
ous and powerful people in Egypt Genesis
XVI. -. The fulflment of this promise was
a cause of anxiety and alarm to the new king.
They probably did not outnumber the Egyp-
tians, but were becoming too numerous and
powerful to be easily controlled or restrained
by the government. The new Theban dynasty
had determined upon more exacting policy
toward these foreign subjects than had been
exercised by the Memphian kings. The wise
policy proposed was an exercise of state craft
that should prevent any further increase of
their numbers. The king did not seem to
fear that they would overrun the country and
take possession of the government, but that
they might ally themselves in time of war
with the enemy, and SO make an opportunity
for going out of the country. They we're
profitable subjects, and the king determined
to restrain them to remain in the land. Be-
sides the usual tribute which may have been
demanded from the produce of their fields,
hocks and herds, he exacted personal service,
and reduced them to the condition of serfs or
bands, or "gangs," under superintendents
and overseers, and compelled to build royal
granares (store cities) for the storing of the
tribute demanded of the cultivators of the
soil. The land belonged to the king and was
rented for fifth of the products Genesis
Xvii. 20-26). The tyrannical purpose of the
king was so to break down the physical
strength of the Israelites and crush their
spirits as to prevent their increase, and de-
stroy any ambition for liberty which they
might cherish. Their service was hard and
exacting,-working in the fields, probably
lifting the water with buckets from the Nile
into the canals, through which it was dis
tributed in the fields, mixing and molding
the clay into bricks, and carrying the bricks
and laying them up into buildings. A rep
resentatiou of the seryitude to which the
Israelites were subjected has been discovered
in painting on the walls of ruined temple
of Thebes in which foreign workmen appear
as brickmakers, with two Egyptians having
uplifted rods looking on.
The bondage of Israel in Egypt from the
accession of the "new king who knew not
Joseph" till the Exodus, under the Divinely
inspired leadership of Moses, period of
more than eighty years. is described as ex-
cessively hard and cruel. Their lives were
embittered with slavery and crushed by hard
and continuous labor. They were not slaves
of individuals, but were drafted into the SER
vice of the king and treated oppressiyely by
their overseers. The House of Bondage was
painful memory during the whole of their
subsequent history, which they were not per-
mitted by their prophets to forget, and espe-
cially the great deliverance by which Con
manifested His favor toward them, and
| through them His grace and mercy to man
kind. Remember that thou was slave in
the land of Egypt, and JEHOVAH thy Gon
brought thee out thence by mighty hand
and by stretched out arm" deuteronomy
V. 49,. The bondage of Israel in Egypt be-
came the type of the bondage of mankind tc
sin and death; and their deliverance by Moses
is made to symbolic the salvation promised
by JESUS CHRIST.
The bondage in Egypt was necessary dis
cipline for Israel as the chosen servant o.
GoD. They were prosperous and contentec
there. That made them willing to return t
the Land of Promise when GoD was ready tC